December 17, 2007

[T]his is the most significant photo taken in the year 2007. Think it will win a Pullitzer? Whichever photog snapped this photo effectively ended Sen. Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign.

There's no recovering from that, image isn't everything, but it counts for a lot, and her image in that photo isn't the image most Americans would want us to project as a nation. You don't have to be wrinkle free to be president, but you can't look haggard and bedraggled, either.

My first reaction to that picture is simple disbelief. How can she suddenly look that much older? I know Presidents age horribly in their few years in office, but she's not President yet, and this seems to have happened overnight. Did some treatment wear off?

But here's my second reaction, on reflection: We make high demands on women. A picture like this of a male candidate would barely register. Fred Thompson always looks this bad, and people seem to think he's handsome. We need to get used to older women and get over the feeling that when women look old they are properly marginalized as "old ladies." If women are to exercise great power, they will come into that power in the 50s, 60s, and 70s. We must — if we care about the advancement of women — accommodate our vision and see a face like this as mature, experienced, serious — the way we naturally and normally see men's faces.

ADDED: A reader (and regular commenter [Reader_Iam) emails this photo of Hillary taken Davenport, Iowa early this year: "I was literally inches from Clinton... I suppose it's possible that she's aged so much this year, but frankly I doubt it. I think she looked quite good in person (better than my photo captured). I think that Drudge photo is a little unfair, and perhaps--perhaps--a little suspect."

(The photo was done with an iPhone. I used iPhoto to crop the picture and to turn up the exposure to brighten the image. I didn't adjust the contrast or touch it up in any other way.)

CORRECTION: That last photo was sent to me by iPhone, but taken on a Nikon Coolpix 4600.

I think it just makes her look more down-to-earth: Less carefully put together and more lived-in, an older professional woman on whom time has taken its toll — as it does on us all — but who has acquired the advantages of experience in exchange.

Drudge and Hillary have been in bed with each other the last 6 months. He was falling all over himself recently to say nice things about her. This may be one of those "sometimes a cigar is just a cigar" moments.

I am not a Hillary fan, but I think the Drudge caption and the Immodest Proposals follow-up is superficial at best and sexist at worst. Hillary doesn't look bedraggled in that photo - she's wearing earrings and lipstick, and her hair is styled. So she's got a few wrinkles - what 60 year old person captured up close and personal on (presumably un-Photoshopped) film wouldn't? Hell, I'm 26 and I sure wouldn't want MY photo taken at such a close proximity - it's not flattering for anyone.

I think it's insulting to the American electorate to imply that we are somehow unable to see the photo for what it is -- a bad photo -- and rise above it.

I wouldn't even vote for HRC at gunpoint, but I actually have to say that I don't find that photo as bad as people are making it out to be -- quite the contrary, she looks positively matronly in the pic, and perhaps her campaign could do well to give off more of that sort of vibe

I would venture to say that photos like this are popular because they make candidates who are trying to project youth, power, relevance, etc., look like hyproctites. Fred Thompson, to use Ms. Althouse's example, doesn't seem to be playing to youth and rebellion, while Ms. Clinton does. Mitt Romney, on the other hand, is often laughed at because he is trying to project a polished, competent, image, and therefore seems fake to many. (Aside from his flip-floppery.)

Golda Meir, Indira Gandhi, Evita Peron and so forth. If beauty is only skin deep and ugliness runs all the way through, what is Hillary like on the inside? Where is her inner beauty? She has a great attitude and personality maybe? Yeah, that's the ticket. Deceive, inveigle, obfuscate ad ifinitum. I loathe her because she's a duplicitous, power-hungry, greedy, self-aggrandizing, socialist baitch. Yes indeed, she stands by her man and the VRWC has it in for her, but she says she can handle them. Might have some trouble with Tim Russert, but she'll wrap those misogynistic Muslims around her little finger. So who'll be her running mate...silk pony or obambi? Pity constitution rules out her loving mate. Oh, how old his her alleged paramour? That'll get the lesbian/muslim vote at least.

We must — if we care about the advancement of women — accommodate our vision and see a face like this as mature, experienced, serious — the way we naturally and normally see men's faces.

We used to have the concept of the matron or the matriarch. women who wielded great moral authority based on a lifetime of experience and accomplishments. Unfortunately, the youth culture and the idea that only professional accomplishments count towards a woman's status, destroy that idea in our culture. Now we see elderly women as worthless.

I can't help but reflect that the last 40 years has seen the boomers first destroy the institutions of those older than they only to recreate them as they reach that age.

There's nothing sexist about that photograph. Yes, it's unflattering, but anyone who is constantly being photographed is going to have some pretty horrendous results (like eating, rubbing your nose, double chin, etc.).

I think what that picture represents is how different Hillary actually looks compared to how she wants the public to see her. That's not deep, nor is it specific to Hillary as all candidates strive to be cast in the best light. Few could dispute that the Clintons (yes, they come as a team) have the most baggage of the lot.

Image is something that they devote more time to than John Edwards does to his hair. A picture like this is indisputably unflattering. Delving into their past is unflattering, but they can let their Carville off his leash to attack when that occurs.

Am I alone in finding this pic more reasuring than all the other ones I have seen of Hillary? Here she looks respectable, mature, even capable. In other pictures she normally looks like she wants to take away 20 years from her life and fails at it. I suspect that she would inspire more confidence if she simply let the wrinkles fall where they may.

I can't imagine ever supporting the Clintons in any way, but the pic is definitely sympathetic. On a deep level we automatically appreciate hard work and exhausting effort, and that is what is showing on her face. Drudge is a wizard.

If America was used to this Hilary Clinton then the photo would be a non-issue. But now it becomes clear, painfully clear, that she's been dousing on the makeup to look as she did back when she was in the White House. It's the change from what we're used to thats the cause for horror. Ugliness won't keep anyone from the White House, but taking off your mask a few weeks before the primaries just might.

Windbag: I don't think it's sexist that the photograph exists. I do, however, think it's sexist to imply that 1) the photograph is evidence that she is exhausted by the pace of her campaign and/or 2) her campaign is over because she doesn't look dewy and sleek in every photo. I'm not sure other photos of other (male) candidates would be scrutinized in quite the same way.

Doyle... do you understand what some of the founding principles of feminism actually are?

The emphasis on the "pretty face" over the substance inside the package when applied to women and not to men is one of the things that feminists rebel against. Not that I think the subtance inside of Hillary is anything better than dog doo. However, it is unfair and discriminatory to make a big deal out of her appearance as an older wrinkled saggy faced woman, when we don't do the same over McCain, Guilliani or Thompson who are also old wrinkled and sagging. So, it's ok to admire Hillary when she is botoxed, made up, hair perfectly coiffed, filmed through layers of gauze but when she accidentally appears as a normal woman she is held up for riducule.

If you don't understand this as a part of feminism, then you don't understand much. Nevermind...answered my own question.

And to Hoosier.... I think Fred Thompson is quite sexy and masculine. You don't have to be handsome or have a full head of hair (witness Sean Connery) to be a sexy devil. :-)

We need to get used to older women and get over the feeling that when women look old they are properly marginalized as "old ladies." If women are to exercise great power, they will come into that power in the 50s, 60s, and 70s.

If women are to exercise great power, then they should exercise.

But, in all seriousness, your comment is wrong. Women get the benefit of being prettier when younger and they bear the cost of looking worse when they're older because of the differential. It isn't that everyone is sexist, it's that women look so much worse than they used to look. Men never looked all that great, so the drop off isn't as steep.

You're saying women should get the natural benefit of being pretty and then get let off the hook by society for falling off.

No way!

Old age hides ugliness and destroys beauty. This picture wouldn't be so effective if Hillary had always been an ugly girl.

Fred Thompson's age has made his ugliness milder. Whereas Hillary Clinton has objectively gotten less attractive and much fatter.

More than most politicians or public figures, Hillary has a tendency to be photographed making an odd face. Who knows why?

But this photo conveys despair to me.

Maybe she knows her campaign team has screwed up her campaign irretrievably.

Or maybe the physical toll of a third national campaign was more than she anticipated at her age.

Or maybe the rigor of maintaining an outwardly pleasant, nurturing and thoughtful demeanor and concealing her "boss from hell" tendencies is tougher now that she's the one out front.

It's not illegitimate to judge candidates on their outward appearance. It's not a matter of mere attractiveness. The face gives a glimpse of the soul underneath. Romney seems dead inside, while Huckabee, Giuliani and McCain come off as far more lively, passionate and humorous. Edwards, for all his phoniness, actually seems like a caring person, and Obama comes off as inspired, both intellectually and spiritually. Richardson looks like a mutt, a follower not a leader. And Hillary gives off the feeling of outraged angst. Like a grandmother counting the days til her grandkids finally send thank you notes for their Christmas presents.

Sure she's unattractive in that photo, and I'm sure her team is pretty pissed about it. But If you've got cameras following you around all day every day, there's going to be some shots that are bad of you. Which begs the question - how many bad shots are there of her (or Barak) that HAVEN'T been circulated? And if those same bad shots have been suppressed, why let this one out now?

Remember how H.W. Bush looked the night of his concession speech in '92? I remember thinking "Wow, he aged instantly!"

There's gotta be some process whereby the candidates gloss their personal looks, with makeup, lighting, etc. That photo of Sen. Clinton looks like the photog slipped backstage and caught her before she was ready. i'm betting the same could be done to Giuliani, Romney, Obama, and Edwards.

I dunno, I find this photo a bit suspect. I took a close-up picture of Sen. Clinton earlier this year (with my son) and was literally just inches from her. Not for publication (because of my son's presence in the picture), but Althouse, I just e-mailed it to you from my iPhone, as a point of reference.

I suppose it's possible she's aged that much, but I doubt it. Also, at least when I was able to scrutinize her up close, she looked just fine, better than most pictures I've seen of her.

I'm late to this party, but here's my 2 cents' worth: So what? I don't like Clinton as a candidate, but I would give her a lot of leeway in how she looks in any given photo. Everybody can get caught looking terrible in a photo.

Also, she doesn't look FAT in person--in fact, I was surprised at how much smaller she was in the flesh than had been my impression! She had to lean over just a bit in order to frame with my then 6-year-old. And she wasn't particularly wide, either, in relation to skinny son.

I was about to write that I didn't care about the photo and that since Clinton is 60, I would expect her to look 60. Still, she would be a horrible president (although far better than Obama).

Then I read this comment:

Women get the benefit of being prettier when younger and they bear the cost of looking worse when they're older because of the differential. It isn't that everyone is sexist, it's that women look so much worse than they used to look.

This is so true (at least for the pretty women....) They get the world when they are young.

I would never vote for Hillary Clinton, and if forced to pull the lever for her, I'd have to burn that hand off with a blowtorch - but really, a picture like this is just a picture, and 60-year-olds have wrinkled faces. It's sad we're using a picture to imply that something's false or wrong. This picture should be filed under "interesting, but not really relevant."

However, even while I decry the use of a picture to slam a candidate, I can't help but point out that this is delicious payback for her surrogate's take-downs in recent days of Obama. Live by the sword, die by the sword. You want to bring up irrelevant & scurrilous charges against others? Then be prepared for the response.

For what it's worth, most people don't realize how much lighting effects photos. The lighting here is coming from above. The shadows as a result are exagerating Hillary's wrinkles and lines. You notice that the lower half of her face is completly shadowed. Plus she has her chin tucked in which tends to loosen the skin on your face and make it look more wrinkly.

To sum up, the stuff you see in movies isn't real people. This is what real people in real situations look like.

I'm a Huckabee supporter, at this point, but I don't think it looks that bad. She looks like an older woman on a cold day. I'd say it makes her look a little more fit for the job than the photos of Obama which make him look like a twenty something.

Olay RegeneristRegenerate your skin's appearance at the cellular level.Regenerist Eye Lifting SerumNotice a complete turnaround in 24 days and all around eye firming, smoothing, and brightening.Olay Regenerist Eye Lifting Serum contains a concentrated form of an exclusive amino-peptide complex that hydrates to firm and visibly lift skin around the entire eye area.Skin's natural glow will be restored and skin is left feeling velvety smooth.The results?Visibly lifts, smooths and brightens the entire eye area for firm eyelids, smooth corners and even-tone under eyes.Use alone or create your own regimen with other Regenerist skin care products.Gentle, fragrance free, dermatologist and opthamologist tested, non-greasy, suitable for everyday use.How to use: Use morning and evening on cleansed skin.Place small dots around the eye area - under eyes, outer corners, eyelids - and smooth in until thoroughly absorbed.To learn more about Regenerist Eye Lifting Serum , talk to an Olay Consultant now!

This more shows the dissonance between the idealised campaign photos and news photos of the last 17 years (err, well, you know what I mean... there have been some horrid photos in that period, just not in this way). Candidates, actors, and image consultants need long term strategies as well as tactics. They've been pushing a youthful image of Hillary, more stylish and experienced but with the appearance of a fit 45-50 year old. This is the mask slipping and evidence that they should have transitioned her projected image.

Laura and Barbara (Sr.) Bush have always projected a matronly image. Ideal for Barbara since she was much older when she became prominent in the media than Hillary, though it has made Laura look older than her years for much of W's Presidency. We think of Barb looking great for her age since she hasn't changed much visually in nearly 30 years. This shows that one needs wisdom to choose the set age one wishes to project, and that some judicious changes need to be made at certain ages.

What makes Presidents seem to age so much in office is the length of a term and how it has been hitting in middle or later-middle age. Presidents are typically going through the second most visually transformational period of their lives, while most of the public won't change their appearance (nor especially their self-perception) in that span of time. The 36 year-old looks much the same as the 28-year old. The 70 year old looks much the same as the 62 year old. But the 60-64 year old looks VERY different than the 52-56 year old.

For the drive-bys... I adore your reliance on logical fallacies for your smears, and your Maoist dedication to today's ideological line that helps identify heretics. Ann is still very left-wing and unfortunately a devotee of essentialist feminism that is quick to find mysogyny everywhere (a mi of 1st & 2nd wave feminism that is understandable given her life experience). Thankfully she's much more civil than you, more reliant on constructive arguments, and willing to discuss with those with whom she differs.

Men and women are people who need to be treated equally as humans with an acceptance and understanding of biological differences. When equal treatment and opportunities leads to disparate results, we should resist the temptation to denounce teh evil1 patriarchy!!1! Instead we should examine what can produce the best overall results - disparate treatment that leads to more equal outcomes or equal treatment that leads to disparate outcomes and manage the effects of the resulting disparity.

If this picture causes problems, it will not be because of how she looks in this picture.

It will be because of how she looks in this picture compared to how she looks normally.

I doubt it will have much of an impact, but if it does it will be because people will feel as if what they have been seeing is a facade and not the real Hillary-- like she is hiding who she is for no reason at all.

She got caught with her Botox down -- that's the issue. She's a phony. The impact of the photo is that it underlines the consistency of her phoniness, just like a debate question on drivers' licenses for illegals ...

Just like that really freaky cackle.

All image and spin. No substance. People are beginning to figure that out, especially in the states where they've seen her in action for awhile.

I agree with you that men and women are judged very differently. In fact someone (on your blog) expressed a fear that he may have to look at Fred Thompson for four years. That sentiment is rare about a man.

That picture made me question why I never wanted anything that much. The answer seemed to be, because I'm not a maniac. Then I thought, "Do I want that kind of maniac for president?" Then answered, "Yes."

jewee thinks that sexy is all about the surface. Well maybe for men it is. However, since all of his ex wife/girlfriends consider him a sexy catch, we might want to consider their opinion instead of a trolling sourpuss who has an ax to grind on this blog.

Plus if we are going to play the picture game, separated at birth take a look at these. No wonder the Democrats are salivating to have this man chosen as the Republican candidate.

Just to clarify (because I was unclear), I sent the photo via my iPhone because this morning I wasn't at a computer with the picture on it. But I took it with a Nikon Coolpix 4600 early this year. And I never touched it up in anyway--I sent it to Althouse as taken, just in case anyone's wondering if I'd tweaked it.

I really wanted Jeane Kirkpatrick to run for President. I would have cheerfully voted for her. Had I been British, I would have enthusiastically supported Margaret Thatcher. I don't care if Senator Clinton looks like the wicked witch of the west or like America's next top model, I wouldn't vote for her as second assistant dog catcher. As a Clinton, she's a professional liar. If she's, for once, telling the truth, her policies as President would be between dangerous and catastrophic.The picture makes her appear somewhat sympathetic. If Drudge wanted to belittle her he could get a recording of her laugh.

I'd argue that the photo is bad because she looks smashed, and twenty years older than my mental image of her. She doesn't look sixty, she looks seventy, seventy-five. And she looks defeated and weak.

Weak and defeated-looking candidates don't get elected dog-catcher, let alone president. Look at Dole's '96 campaign. His aged fragility in comparison to Clinton couldn't have helped his campaign. I could imagine that McCain might be vulnerable to this sort of thing, too, if he'd ever catch fire enough to get the photogs out and baying after his hide.

After the darkness the feeble light of the paraffin lamp had seemed very bright. For the first time he could see the woman properly. He had taken a step towards her and then halted, full of lust and terror. He was painfully conscious of the risk he had taken in coming here. It was perfectly possible that the patrols would catch him on the way out: for that matter they might be waiting outside the door at this moment. If he went away without even doing what he had come here to do -!

It had got to be written down, it had got to be confessed. What he had suddenly seen in the lamplight was that the woman was old. The paint was plastered so thick on her face that it looked as though it might crack like a cardboard mask. There were streaks of white in her hair; but the truly dreadful detail was that her mouth had fallen a little open, revealing nothing except a cavernous blackness. She had no teeth at all.

He wrote hurriedly, in scrabbling handwriting:

When I saw her in the light she was quite an old woman, fifty years old at least. But I went ahead and did it just the same."

Mortimer: "You're saying women should get the natural benefit of being pretty and then get let off the hook by society for falling off."

When did I say young pretty women should get an advantage? It's quite sexist to decide when women should be better off than men and when they should be worse off, especially when it has to do with marginalizing older women. It is the older women who have the experience to exercise great power. The younger women should not be using their looks to get special access (a la Monica Lewinsky). They should want to make it on merit like me and to have long careers. Anything else is part of a dynamic that subordinates women.

jjj: "Apparently you don't understand that Ann is posting this picture to hold Hillary up to ridicule. Which says far more about Ann than the picture says about Hillary."

You are revealing yourself, not me. That picture is up on Drudge. He gets millions of hits a day. I get maybe 20,000 on a big day. I'm not giving this photo more visibility. It already has maximum visibility. I'm commenting on what it means and how people subjectively see it. This reminds me of the time recently when I linked to a picture of Pattie Harrison and with a comment like want to see how she looks now and some of my readers thought I was saying look how terrible she looks now. Absolutely not what I meant, but it shows how you think.

I saw her interviewed on MSNBC this morning, and her makeup was horrible. Really heavy, light frosty eye shadows and heavy blush in an unflattering rectangle on each cheek. I have no idea who did that to her or why, but she looks better in this picture than she did on MSNBC. She just looks wrinkled in this picture - so what!?

We must — if we care about the advancement of women — accommodate our vision and see a face like this as mature, experienced, serious — the way we naturally and normally see men's faces.

I'm going to assume it's genuine and won't beat around the bush: before seeing this pic, I've said that I think she's attractive, and having seen it, nothing's changed. It is (or purports to be) an unflattering picture of a woman in her sixties who's tired and stressed, which is what you'd expect. Big deal. The more important issue that it prompts, as Ann's post notes, is what the reaction to it reveals about how people react to women who look their age.

Second: I forget where I read this, but there was a study that correlated appearance and virility, which (to tie to another comment thread) is why men seem super attracted to very young women and early adolescent girls- they have the highest possibility of successful reproduction.

Once women reach menopause (is that a sexist term) they tend to lose their attractiveness.

This is also another reason why men remain fairly attractive later in life- they also remain sexually potent.

There's no force on earth that could force me to vote for Hillary Clinton, but that photo doesn't matter.

Nor does any other photo. I don't care what a candidate looks like. I don't even care much what they sound like when giving a speech.

All I care about is what they've demonstrated. Hillary looks fine in any photo from the waist up. And I don't hold the "Weebles Wobble" look against anyone anyway - I ain't no beauty.

The only thing that matters to me is that she wants yet more money from my pocket and the plain fact of the matter is I can't afford no more. I need all my extra pennies to prepare for my dotterage 'cause, you see, I'm not even 10 years behind Mizz Hillary and I don't imagine the gumming is going to be there to help me out. So I want those grubby, gummint fingers outta my pocket so I can stash something for me and my Mizzis. Hillary can pound salt as far as I'm concerned.

The Hillary pic serves as yet another Rorshach blot for the lefties here who obsess over Ann's political purity, or lack thereof, in their ongoing effort to excommunicate her from their leftwing congregation for apostacy.

We get back into the old introvert-extrovert biz, now. Someone like Bill Clinton is a natural extrovert - he feeds on the crowds, draws energy from it, flourishes on 14-hour days in front of crowds. Think Arnold Schwarzenegger. Think Reagan.

Others who are natural introverts but in politics and posing in an extroverted way because that is what the media expects are drained of energy by the crowd.Nixon was like that. He had to rest up after campaigning because being hyped up in masses of people for sustained times exhausted him. Johnny Carson was drained doing conedy then the Tonight Show. Hillary may be an introvert.

But if she isn't, those long days and shifting hours make even an extrovert feel like its "Ground Hog Day" - same shit, again and again and again.

The other way to get exhausted is to be an extrovert like Jimmy Carter, but be a dumb micromanager burning out trying to juggle 200 things at once - but missing putting time and energy into 2-3 big things and letting others worry about the cheap shit.

Maybe that's her problem if she isn't an introvert.

Mortimer - Old age hides ugliness and destroys beauty. This picture wouldn't be so effective if Hillary had always been an ugly girl.

I thought you were straight! Hillary was never a looker. She needs Nancy Botoxi's emergency cosmetics assist team, pronto.

That photo of Sen. Clinton looks like the photog slipped backstage and caught her before she was ready. i'm betting the same could be done to Giuliani, Romney, Obama, and Edwards.

I don't think Romney can be a bad picture unless one can be taken of him losing his cool. Pedigree. His Dad almost went to Hollywood in the 30s on offers to be a cowboy villain when his junior exec job was paying nothing and going nowhere. Romney's Mom Lenore was a Hollywood ingenue, rescued from a 3-year MGM contract and the Sodom and Gomorrah life back to pure Mormonhood by marrying George Romney. She almost was elected Senator back in 1970.An interesting family.The one who looks really bad now is McCain. Below his forehead, his whole face is bloating and melting. (Doctor friend of mine speculates that McCain is on heavy steroids for post-melanoma treatment (cortisone bloating)or that when he had his cancer surgeries they scarred up and blocked off lymph drainages) McCain looks sick, not just old.

Cedarford wrote:"I thought you were straight! Hillary was never a looker."

Aesthetics are a matter of opinion. I didn't think she looked particularly good when she was younger, but I think since she finally figured out how to dress and how to wear her hair, and as she's grown into her features, she's blossomed. I'd have said this morning that she's attractive now, and this picture changes that assessment not a whit.

Why are we so obsessed with how someone looks? I don't care if she looks like an ingenue or a charwoman. I care about who she is.

This woman was the America's Assistant Grifter-in-Chief, and she wants to have the top Grifter job now. I don't want her to, but her looks are irrelevant to my rejection of her and her political beliefs.

Think of it this way - would you support Ann Coulter over this woman because of looks, or do you (rightfully) say that it's not the looks, it's the thoughts?

Anybody can have an unflattering picture taken. We don't know what she was saying or what expression she was making when the picture was snapped. I'm not a Hillary fan by any means, but this reminds me of the unflattering pics people find of Bush, Michelle Malkin, and numerous other people to use in snarky blog posts.

There's some high-minded snootiness in this thread about our collective obsession with appearance. I'll gladly pat you all on the back for your nobility.

However.

The reality that no one can change is that the electorate, in general, is very sensitive to appearance. You can rail about issues and experience all you want, but when that curtain closes for many voters, it's about who they want to stare at for the next 4 years.

Thanks for your pat-on-the-back, but really, you can keep it to yourself. I'm truly amazed at your mind-reading of the electorate, though. You should really clean up after election day '08 given how intelligently you should be able to place your bets.

The one who looks really bad now is McCain. Below his forehead, his whole face is bloating and melting. (Doctor friend of mine speculates that McCain is on heavy steroids for post-melanoma treatment (cortisone bloating)or that when he had his cancer surgeries they scarred up and blocked off lymph drainages) McCain looks sick, not just old.

Not to mention being beaten severely during 8 years of being a POW in the Hanoi Hilton. That wouldn't have anything to do with it.

someone mentioned the HRC-Drudge detente upthread. Perhaps this is simply a method for HRC to gain support from the older generation ladies in Iowa--may not even need an email asking for support or a statement from her about the picture--Note to self: Boy--have I gotten even more cynical and conspiratorial. Clearly CDS at work.

Mutaman said..."Has the Ole Perfesser Althouse looked in the mirror lately? Talk about the pot calling the kiettle black."

Please. She's a strikingly beautiful woman, and to pretend otherwise is quite simply ludicrous. Watch the most recent vlog; it'll be easy to spot because it'll burn the outermost layer off your cornea.

Mutaman: "Has the Ole Perfesser Althouse looked in the mirror lately? Talk about the pot calling the kiettle black. Some of her pictures are enough to make me want to pull over to the side of the road and weep."

When did I say young pretty women should get an advantage? It's quite sexist to decide when women should be better off than men and when they should be worse off, especially when it has to do with marginalizing older women. It is the older women who have the experience to exercise great power. The younger women should not be using their looks to get special access (a la Monica Lewinsky). They should want to make it on merit like me and to have long careers. Anything else is part of a dynamic that subordinates women.

Perhaps it is because the Children's Revolution always inspired me, but I don't buy that older people are better positioned to exercise power. Older people are less receptive to new ideas, more set in their ways, more invested in the status quo, and have declining faculties, both mental and physical. Whereas the young are more open-minded, more willing to take risk, more willing to shake things up, work harder and longer, and innovate more.

I think it is sexist -- and it subordinates women -- to say they can't use their looks. Looks are a natural advantage. Maybe I read too much Nietzsche as a kid, but I think it's an immoral society that prevents someone from using their natural talents or attributes to get ahead. (I just never understood the argument for ugly news anchors.) Frankly, saying young women can't use their looks is just a way that old women subordinate young women and rich women who lack looks, but can afford education and avoiding pregnanacy, etc., subordinate poorer women without equivalent access to resources.

While I wouldn't dispute that you made it on merit, you were a looker when you were younger (not saying you're not now!) and certainly benefitted in terms of people treating you better, assuming the best of your intentions, and all the other social advantages that accrue to attractive people. I don't think there's anything wrong with that.

Maybe I'm just a big old sexist, but I frankly don't see anything wrong with having sex with co-workers, whatever the power relations. I think sexual harrassment law has made a lot of people way too uptight. I remember when I worked at a state government agency, everyone hit on everyone all the time, in stark defiance of the sexual harrassment informational session. I mean, it was filthy and raunchy. But it was all in good fun. The women were nasty and the men were nasty and we all got our work done quickly because it was a pleasant place to work. And it's not so weird to meet someone you like at work: you're there most of the day, every day of the week. Banning natural human interaction seems like the greater wrong. I know, I am supporting Clinton's subordination of his intern. Hey, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

She has a way of looking outrageously bad in candid snapshots. What do you expect her to look like at the end of her second term, when she's pushing 70? Maybe wrinkles should seem presidential in some way.

Mutaman: "Has the Ole Perfesser Althouse looked in the mirror lately? Talk about the pot calling the kiettle black. Some of her pictures are enough to make me want to pull over to the side of the road and weep."

Well the fact is that if you do something you're actually interested in, looks don't matter.

How women fail in math : those that show up tend to be ones proving that women can do math, rather than just liking math. They wind up in charge of the women's work issues committee reporting to the chairman ; where the guys who like math come in and do math, and like it.

If Hillary likes campaigning, then her looks don't matter, no matter what anybody says. She may win or not because of them, but it won't affect her enjoyment.

If instead it's a nightmare minefield of playing to the media, then she's going to be disappointed ; and probably will wind up in charge of the Fairness for Ugly Women committee and wondering why she can't get any respect.

Verso said..."[Ann] ha[s] decided to throw in with these people. You and they share a common cause. You are on their team."

It really doesn't work like that; even if she had (and once you take off the partisan blinkers you'll see how silly that suggestion is, although she's welcome in the VRWC any time she wants in), you don't get to tar all Republicans with Drudge's dreck.

I have to say I am now in the camp of people who thinks this is an HRC ploy to engender sympathy by baiting male Dems and conersvatives to bash her. Taylor Marsh couldn't have cooked up a better tactic.

SGT Ted said... The one who looks really bad now is McCain. Below his forehead, his whole face is bloating and melting. (Doctor friend of mine speculates that McCain is on heavy steroids for post-melanoma treatment (cortisone bloating)or that when he had his cancer surgeries they scarred up and blocked off lymph drainages) McCain looks sick, not just old.

SGT Ted said...Not to mention being beaten severely during 8 years of being a POW in the Hanoi Hilton. That wouldn't have anything to do with it.

Nope, the 'ol POW excuse for any bad McCain position or misjudgement (if you were beaten by the Vietnamese, you'd have taken money from Keating too and been Open Borders on immigration)- has nothing to do with it. Pictures of McCain's face in the 80s and 90s are normal.

Me, I'm not interested in the stud/babe factor in a Presidential candidate. Were I in the market for a girlfriend -- I think my wife might object if I were -- I suspect that that babitude might be a larger factor than it ought to be, but . . .

Of all the criticism I've heard of Hillary!, it hasn't been about her lack of hotness. Were she running against Jessica Alba, well . . .

No one would've ever said of Margaret Thatcher that her looks doomed her candidacy, but then Thatcher's candidacy was never about her looks.

A question for feminists both left and right: do you find it irritating or inspiring that conservatives always reduce your concerns on the treatment of women in politics to the two words "Margaret Thatcher"?

We do love Margaret Thatcher -- not some token kind of, "Why yes, some of my best friends are women," but the "Ronald Reagan is my copilot" kind of love.

When we say, "Give us a Margaret Thatcher and we don't care what she looks like we'll vote for her," we mean it. Just so you know.

We must — if we care about the advancement of women — accommodate our vision and see a face like this as mature, experienced, serious — the way we naturally and normally see men's faces.

Yeah, I'll get right to work on that, as soon as I can see again, maybe in a couple of months.

But seriously, if she looks like that now, a few years into a presidency she'll make Jimmy Carter look like Johnny Depp. Sure, looks are unimportant up to a point, but I think most voters will want to be able to watch the news without fear of being turned to stone.

The picture is damaging because it's a visual representation of a broader theme; she--like her campaign--is overpackaged and overproduced, in the attempt to hide the uglier aspects of her personality. She holds the American people in such contempt that she believes they'll be deceived by a little focus-group-driven rhetoric into believing that she's competent, and by a little makeup into believing that she's thirty-nine.

Do you think a post about Hilary's health care proposals would generate this much comment? Looks matter. I remember reading some time ago about a photographer who caught Reagan looking old and confused. He snapped the photo and thought he would surely win a Pulitzer. When the picture was developed, he was disappointed to discover that Reagan looked poised and confident. Reagan wasn't a Hollywood star for nothing. I have no objection to Hilary looking tired and old--who wouldn't with such a schedule. My objection is that anytime Bush leaves his jaw agape or slouches in his chair you can pretty much depend on the photo editors to put that picture on the front page. The fact that there are so few unflattering pictures of Hillary is suspect.

I work in a photography studio, and I say that the "difference" is entirely created by lighting. News photos are typically indoors, taken with a flash that is close to the lens. It's called "flat lighting" and is generally held to be unflattering— but one thing it does is minimize wrinkles. The steeper the angle of the light, the more that wrinkles are emphasized.

If flashes are not used for an indoor shoot, there are still typically lights positioned at angles other than striaght overhead so that the candidates' faces are well-lit.

So I look at that photo of Hillary and see an older woman at midday. Nothing especially sinister about those wrinkles. And the fact that she isn't smiling makes it look worse, but it's a candid, after all. Everybody has unflattering angles, even someone such as Beyonce.

Were thine that special face?The face which fills my dreaming,Were thine the rhythm'd grace,Were thine the form so lithe and slender, Were thine the arms so warm, so tender,Were thine the kiss divine,Were thine the love for me,The love which fills my dreaming,When all these charms are thineThen you'll be mine, all mine.

but she was chipper as a cricket on the live interviews she did on the cables today. Maybe she just had indigestion yesterday. Nah this choo choo train will need much more slowing than a mere snapshot will furnish. Obama will take her down, or we get her all day every day for 1, 4, or 8 years.

Plastic surgery has gotten so *obvious* lately that my only reaction to the photo of Hillary is to take her more seriously.

Not that I'd never get anything done if I had the funds (I don't know that I *would* either, since I *don't* have the funds) but it just seems to me that a face lift that *looks* lifted is worse than wrinkles, boobs that look balloony are worse than A cups, and lips like a duck bill are far worse than a natural thin lipped mouth.

We made fun of Pelosi's perpetual look of astonished surprise because it was so obvious that her face was pulled halfway back her head.

Danny: If America was used to this Hilary Clinton then the photo would be a non-issue. It's the change from what we're used to thats the cause for horror. Ugliness won't keep anyone from the White House, but taking off your mask a few weeks before the primaries just might.

I agree with Ms. Althouse, but she undermines her essential point by posting a extremely flattering, if not intriguing, photo aimed right for the lizard brain, which, if her bloggingheads appearances are any indication, isn't exactly representative. Ms. Althouse and Ms. Clinton are women of a certain age and yet neither one wants to give up presnting looks more in keeping with 20 or 30 something women. (This is true for men as well, by the way; adolesecence forever! We can only blame the sixties for turning old age into a syndrome.) Ms. Althouse, embrace your decline! There is poetry in aging. 50 is not the new 30, except in IQ.

Do men (and women) want this face to be on TV, newspaper and all over the media for the next four or eight years telling you to do this and do that, and preaching that men should be more like women and other her feminists nonsense? Do we REALLY want that?

In Asia (and many other parts of the world) people say that the face gives insights to the inner mind of the people. Hillary looks OLD (indeed really, really OLD) in the picture, but it’s not just being old that make most people feel awfully disgusted. I think the picture shows a true FACE of a person (happens to be a woman, yeah!) who have been pursuing unbridled power and control over other people, a true face of radical gender feminist warrior and petit-totalitarianist.

Ugh, I'm so sick of women being judged so differently from men. What are looks in a presidential candidate, anyway? This is the one time that I think the French have it all over us, as they seem to appreciate the "older" woman (40 and over) more so than we do.

As for the picture -- lighting is everything. Plus, a cold day can really bring out the dry skin and wrinkles. So what's the big deal?

Why did Nixon lose to Kennedy in 1960? Is it sexism against men? Why Ronald Reagan had to wear make up in front of camera? Do face and style never matter in politics? What, are you living in 19th century?

Managing and projecting good (and young, fresh) images is an important pillar of modern-day political campaigning. That’s why many campaigns hire scores of image consultants, stylists, etc. But when a woman stumbles on this one time, and all of a sudden there is huge cry of sexism?

Presidents age poorly because of the stress of the job. Hillary is aging poorly because of the stress of a campaign where she must continue being disingenuous on a daily basis to even stay in the race. Her flip-flopping on driver's licenses for illegal aliens is a case in point. She can't give a straight answer to any question without first wetting her finger and sticking it in the wind to gage what answer will best serve her. Lying is in itself very stressful and doing it poorly is even more so. She always gets caught.